[arch-projects] [devtools] [PATCH 1/2] arch-nspawn, mkarchroot: Allow not sharing the cache directories.
Maarten de Vries
maarten at de-vri.es
Thu Jan 17 16:24:54 UTC 2019
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 17:15, Eli Schwartz <eschwartz at archlinux.org> wrote:
> On 1/17/19 6:27 AM, Maarten de Vries wrote:
> > The commit you linked earlier, is that something that will find
> > it's way into mainline devtools?
> >  https://github.com/eli-schwartz/devtools/commit/c0681c0ec0a93a4a4eaf9b2fd85ce48a30702a03
> Unlikely. Not that I'm opposed to it happening, it's just totally not
> worth my time to even try.
> The last time I tried to submit a patch for devtools was here:
> This is when it was finally merged:
> It was only merged at that time, because despite my having contributed a
> patch months before which make makechrootpkg work *at all* with pacman
> 5.1 on the host system, no one was actually reading this mailing list
> who had commit rights for devtools.
> Eventually, when pacman 5.1 was released, people started complaining in
> the private staff channel that they could no longer build packages,
> which is sort of awkward for the maintenance of the distribution, right?
> Anyway, I said "I have pending patches from months ago that were
> supposed to make this a non-issue", and I appealed directly to Allan in
> order to merge it, and he asked me for a commit id that I thought should
> be merged.
> And this is the story of how I actually managed to get some changes into
> devtools. By hunting down someone on IRC *after* the emergency has
> already happened.
> (Observant witnesses will note that there is another patch after that,
> also written by me. That doesn't count, as one of the devtools
> maintainers had something which bothered them enough to work on
> devtools, and asked about it in IRC, and I wrote the patch basically on
> I have lots of changes I want to actually make practical use of on a
> personal level, and I *also* want to use modifications in order to build
> packages for an archlinux32 chroot. I'm well on the way to totally
> forking everything, and my changes are just going to get more
> significant. Attempting to upstream a collection of controversial as
> well as non-controversial changes, when my chances of even being heard
> in the first place are... dim... is not worth the time when I can simply
> sudo make install something that makes me happy and gets things done.
I see. In that case I'll stick with a fork for now. Thanks again for
the feedback :)
More information about the arch-projects